Research misconduct: Theory & Pratico
A whistleblower tried to report fraud in Domenico Pratico’s papers via proper channels, and hit a wall everywhere.
By Leonid Schneider, on research integrity, biomedical ethics and academic publishing
A whistleblower tried to report fraud in Domenico Pratico’s papers via proper channels, and hit a wall everywhere.
“I am highly admired by my colleagues for the high level of rigor and reproducibility I continue to apply to research. ” Dr David Danielpour
A tale of brave academic editors fighting those bad, naughty, annoying anonymous whistleblower trolls
“Wrong again Do you have a problem?” – Bob Bloch
From Lesné’s public shame to successful role models of neuroscience like Aguzzi and Tessier-Lavigne.
“As pioneers in the field of regenerative medical therapies, we at Direct Biologics are changing the future of medicine.”
Yo, what’s up, my homies, Shaker Mousa is in da house.
“I feel that these continuous comments(s) may be pushing the boundaries, which should also be a concern for PubPeer.” – Dr Richard Vierstra
An academic dynasty of bad cancer research.
The part of the fraud affair not included on Retraction Watch









